Jump to content
Floralpikmin99

New Biomes

Recommended Posts

Also because aside from Balloon dragons, eggs don't float and sky dragons generally would land to lay their eggs. And they'd land in... guess what... one of the existing biomes. Or a grassland, tundra, or freshwater habitat.

 

This has already been discussed, if a sky biome were to exist it would likely be floating islands not actual sky. 'Sky' is just kind of the theme.

 

I think because grassland and freshwater would count as actual locations, as opposed to the sky which is everywhere. A flying dragon can be found in say, the forest, but obviously we still expect it would be found in the sky flying over all the trees. It just doesn't make sense that there would need to be a biome that restricts flying dragons to just one area of the sky when they could otherwise be found anywhere.

 

True, flying dragons could be found anywhere but what's not to say that flying dragons would congregate is a high up area (floating islands) to lay eggs? It'd be up to TJ whether the sky themed dragons are exclusive to the floating islands.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, Horse Dragons (or dragon horses?) would be on top of the list, due to them needing space for their running take-offs. And deserts don't really work well for that, for neither sand nor sharp rocks are ideal for creatures with a single hoof on each leg.

 

Terraes need lots of sunlight, since they perform photosynthesis, but they also need to forage (if my memory isn't faulty). The ground of both forest and jungle is too dark, since the leaves already take up most of the light for their own photosynthesis. Yet in the desert, there's too little plant life (and no place for the flightless females to hide).

 

Whiptails need open space for doing their races, so they'd fit better in a grasslands biome than any of the wooded biomes.

 

Anagallis would be a better match for grasslands (mostly prairie) than any of the three biomes they currently inhabit. Dorsals seem to be a better fit for grasslands (prairie) than for jungle. Summer seasonals are a good fit, too - on the same grounds that winter seasonals got moved to Alpine. Hooktalons would work for both Grasslands and Desert - "bushlands" are usually quite grassy, too.

 

And, of course, there's that long completed list with lots of concepts that got shoved either into desert or jungle or forest due to the lack of a grasslands biome.

Which breeds would be a good fit for the Freshwater biome? Moved or added?

 

An obvious one (for me) would be the Striped River:

Striped River Dragons dwell in clear, deep-moving water.
Undines:
Undine Dragons are named for the water spirits with which they share territory. They have close relationships with these spirits, and are able to communicate with them. In exchange for protection and respect of their mutual freshwater homes, laid eggs are often protected by a blessing
Water Dragons:
When a water dragon matures, it loses almost all use of its legs as well as its ability to survive on land and enters the water permanently. They are adept swimmers and eat whatever fish are in the lake they live in.
Water Walkers:
Water walkers are small dragons that are frequently found around bogs and ponds.

ETA: added some breeds.

Edited by NotBambi

Share this post


Link to post

Which breeds would be a good fit for the Freshwater biome? Moved or added?

Could lineages be damaged if those breeds were moved from the Coast to the Freshwatera?

Share this post


Link to post

The only possible damaged lineages would be moved dragons x Coppers where the moved dragon breed was female. People who are currently doing such lineages could always trade for eggs from those with that breed from before the shift. On the whole though I think that would be such a small number as to be insignificant. Some Xenos might occasionally also throw a different egg than one of the parent breeds but I don't think that's much of an issue either.

 

One effect of adding biomes is that there would not be a Copper coloration native to that biome unless I came up with another and TJ agreed to release it. Right now there is a Copper of one of the three colors dropping in every biome. Another effect is that right now there's one Xenowyrm type per biome. That would also change. That doesn't have to be any kind of reason to not go forward with this idea.

Edited by Fiona BlueFire

Share this post


Link to post
The only possible damaged lineages would be moved dragons x Coppers where the moved dragon breed was female. People who are currently doing such lineages could always trade for eggs from those with that breed from before the shift. On the whole though I think that would be such a small number as to be insignificant. Some Xenos might occasionally also throw a different egg than one of the parent breeds but I don't think that's much of an issue either.

 

One effect of adding biomes is that there would not be a Copper coloration native to that biome unless I came up with another and TJ agreed to release it. Right now there is a Copper of one of the three colors dropping in every biome. Another effect is that right now there's one Xenowyrm type per biome. That would also change. That doesn't have to be any kind of reason to not go forward with this idea.

A 4th color Copper? Yes!!! I know there are a lot of "ifs" involved but I can't avoid being thrilled.

Share this post


Link to post

I really think that the upshot is that we need new biomes because we have so many more dragons than we did five years ago, and we're bound to get eight or more each year from here on out, unless something significantly changes. That way we'd have more room for new dragons, and I wouldn't even say we'd have to move the ones we already have.

@Silver_chan

Were you thinking of any particular reason to not move when you wrote "I wouldn't even say we'd have to move the ones we already have" or were you just thinking that we will have more than enough future breeds to fill those additional biomes?

Share this post


Link to post
@Silver_chan

Were you thinking of any particular reason to not move when you wrote "I wouldn't even say we'd have to move the ones we already have" or were you just thinking that we will have more than enough future breeds to fill those additional biomes?

I was more thinking... we could put some of the breeds we have there while still keeping them in their current biomes. I don't know. I'm just trying to think of a way we can have new biomes while keeping the majority of the players happy.

 

And yeah, considering we have so many breeds now released each year, I'm sure we'll soon have more than enough to fill whatever new biomes we add. That's part of why I want them, because we're just going to get more crowded from here.

 

But if people are ok with moving them, I have zero objections.

Share this post


Link to post

With the vast majority of dragons that fit with the new biomes it is probably appropriate to simply add the new biomes to the list of where they appear. However, there are some, most notably Horse, and possibly others, that really don't belong where they currently are if the appropriate biome is added.

 

Although, adding to the number of biomes dragons are found rather than actually moving them doesn't do much for any crowding concern. Plus, I would assume that any new biome would have the not insignificant list of dragons that currently appear in all biomes added to what appears there.

Edited by Pokemonfan13

Share this post


Link to post

I don't necessarily think we should start off right away with adding "new" biomes. I think the idea of maybe listing the top six biome names for renaming or changes would be a possible good place to start, and then after having the top six that best fit the needs of this world (pretending we can't ever be certain if more would be added), and then make a list of the top 1-2- however many extras we would like to have if we can get those after the fact.

 

I think it's great to talk about new biomes, I think it is a fantastic idea. But it seems that the quickest implementation would be to possibly rename and/or expand the containment of the current biomes so TJ doesn't have to change anything other than possibly some wording. I understand there is some artwork involved. But I don't see that as a really large issue. The artwork could stay the same, or more could be added later, or something could be tweaked. But I think if people would like to see more biomes/ranges, etc, renaming the six we have might be an easier place to start.

 

Not to stop discussion on the other topic, but in that respect, they are 2 different steps.

Share this post


Link to post
With the vast majority of dragons that fit with the new biomes it is probably appropriate to simply add the new biomes to the list of where they appear. However, there are some, most notably Horse, and possibly others, that really don't belong where they currently are if the appropriate biome is added.

 

Although, adding to the number of biomes dragons are found rather than actually moving them doesn't do much for any crowding concern. Plus, I would assume that any new biome would have the not insignificant list of dragons that currently appear in all biomes added to what appears there.

Very good points. I was mostly reacting to something that seems to be gone now, where someone was proposing we get rid of the Jungle/Forest and just have one biome with trees, among other things. The thought of moving *every* species that was in the Jungle/Forest to one tree-filled biome made me go 'wait a minute now...'

 

Moving a smaller number around would be perfectly acceptable, really. And you're right, there are an awful lot of dragons that show up in every biome. That will help fill things out a bit.

Share this post


Link to post

With the vast majority of dragons that fit with the new biomes it is probably appropriate to simply add the new biomes to the list of where they appear.  However, there are some, most notably Horse, and possibly others, that really don't belong where they currently are if the appropriate biome is added.

 

Although, adding to the number of biomes dragons are found rather than actually moving them doesn't do much for any crowding concern.  Plus, I would assume that any new biome would have the not insignificant list of dragons that currently appear in all biomes added to what appears there.

In my opinion, Striped River, Undines, Water Dragons and Water Walkers should be moved to to the Freshwater biome, if it is created. But I'll not argue if people disagree. I'm quite curious about the opinions of the relative spriters and I assume they will have the final say or at least the pre-TJ final say biggrin.gif

 

 

Edited to fix double posting.

I don't necessarily think we should start off right away with adding "new" biomes.

Guess we strongly disagree on that. Actually, the topic I started and was merged on this was only about adding more biomes since the number of breeds increased significantly since the biomes were created 5 years ago.

Edited by NotBambi

Share this post


Link to post
I would much rather the existing biomes stay as they are. I'd just like to add a couple.

 

Plus, we just got amazing new art for the existing biomes. I can't see re-organizing and eliminating any of the ones we have now so soon after getting that wonderful art.

Natayah, while the OP is talking about changing the existing biomes I don't really think that's a good idea, as I said on the page before.

 

We've been talking about adding a couple biomes and which we think fit best rather than changing the existing ones we just got amazing new art for.

Share this post


Link to post

Fi, I don't think the existing biomes should go away, as I don't want the art to go away and be void. But I think the Biomes could have some name Expansions like: Dessert & Wastelands, or Forest and Prairie, vs just Forest or Desert. (I'm Not saying these should be the ones used, just as an example) And I don't think the biomes need to include a long name, I would choose a DC Valk sounding name that sounded like whatever other regions we might expand into near a desert other than just ... sand. And there are many deserts where there are tons of wildlife.

 

I'm not looking to change coast from what it is. But adding Coast with All Waterways would be an easier suggestion, imo, than separating the Ocean from the Freshwater. Doesn't mean it couldn't be done in the future, I just think that is an easier way to hit it from at first. It's ok if people disagree with me. But a jungle could just as easily bleed over into swampy areas or just general Tropical regions, or anything. I think it is easier to think of them as "Regions" or "Shared Biomes or Ecology" or even just make up unique Valk type names for them. The artwork would still represent these areas. If not the entire area, at least important parts of it. Putting Mountains and Tundra Together, they may not always go together in the biome strata on Earth, but they do have relations that wouldn't make them logically crazy things to relate or combine. And it doesn't have to be that, again, it's just another suggestion.

 

I wouldn't have suggested it on my own, but the PM TJ had Cinn post from ... was it 2013... I think was a really original idea and I like the idea of it. And I just don't know how fast we are going to get new biomes when we just got artwork from the old one. That's pretty much the summary. Not against new biomes. Very much for. I just think renaming or reorganizing the current ones while keeping their original biome as a portion of it might be an easier start than rebuilding the biome system from scratch. And on that, I could be totally wrong, but I don't know. That's just my gut feeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Which breeds would be a good fit for the Freshwater biome? Moved or added?

From a few posts back... All these in the description meaning water, most of the (eg the ones without the "?" is definite for me... Not including encyclopedia!)

 

But IMO, we really need a freshwater biome:

- Undine

- water dragon (says in the description they live in LAKES)

- blue banded

- Striped River

- Flamingo

- Water Walkers

 

- Xenowyrm (Thalassa)?

- Waterhorse?

Share this post


Link to post

Personally, I'd love 2 extra biomes (grasslands, wetlands) with a new copper coloration (see my avatar - I love that one!) and two new xenowyrms. (Maybe one that's more earth-themed than Gaia for grasslands and one neutral- or light-themed Xeno for wetlands? Unfortunately, both water and life are already taken, so that's the closest fit I could find.)

Share this post


Link to post

Ah, I see where your thoughts are going Natayah. I don't disagree, actually. Enlarging the definitions of the biomes would not be a bad start. It would mean expanding the paragraph at the top of each one to include more description of what is there. Otherwise you just really have the same problem we have now, whatever you call the biomes. If we switch to Valkemarian sounding names what they represent is still not going to be automatically understood. Long names are probably not a good idea, and so we need a way for people to know what's included in that biome's territory. That's part of the problem we have now. "Jungle" doesn't say "I include the savannahs" to anyone and there's nothing in the descriptions that indicates savannahs are included, for example.

 

I'm not sure what point we will reach when new biomes are actually needed. Certainly they don't have as many breeds yet as the original single cave but having biomes also spreads out the players so you don't have as many taking eggs from each to keep them moving. I wouldn't really call them overcrowded now, and even if new biomes are added there will continue to be new breeds added to the existing. But I do think we're at a point where it could be beneficial to consider new biomes.

 

 

---

And Olympe, I didn't actually say that if we added new biomes we'd get a new copper color. All I was saying was adding biomes would mean some thinking would have to be done regarding coppers. Maybe adding a color would be what I would decide to do, and maybe not. And the nekkid copper in your avi is not really likely to be what I'd choose. All the other coppers show the effects of their environment. Why would freshwater or plains be all scrubbed shiny clean?

Share this post


Link to post
And Olympe, I didn't actually say that if we added new biomes we'd get a new copper color. All I was saying was adding biomes would mean some thinking would have to be done regarding coppers. Maybe adding a color would be what I would decide to do, and maybe not. And the nekkid copper in your avi is not really likely to be what I'd choose. All the other coppers show the effects of their environment. Why would freshwater or plains be all scrubbed shiny clean?

Because there are rocks or sand (in wetlands) or bushes or even something like common horsetail (in grasslands) to scrub copper clean? smile.gif There sure isn't the heat to make them shiny, and not the volatile environment to cause them to go all green.

 

Kidding aside, I knew perfectly well that you wouldn't choose the original copper anyway - but a girl can dream. wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Personally, I'd love 2 extra biomes (grasslands, wetlands) with a new copper coloration (see my avatar - I love that one!) and two new xenowyrms. (Maybe one that's more earth-themed than Gaia for grasslands and one neutral- or light-themed Xeno for wetlands? Unfortunately, both water and life are already taken, so that's the closest fit I could find.)

I'm all for adding grasslands and wetlands. More coppers and xenos would be a fantastic bonus.

Share this post


Link to post
Fi, I don't think the existing biomes should go away, as I don't want the art to go away and be void. But I think the Biomes could have some name Expansions like: Dessert & Wastelands, or Forest and Prairie, vs just Forest or Desert. (I'm Not saying these should be the ones used, just as an example) And I don't think the biomes need to include a long name, I would choose a DC Valk sounding name that sounded like whatever other regions we might expand into near a desert other than just ... sand. And there are many deserts where there are tons of wildlife.

 

I'm not looking to change coast from what it is. But adding Coast with All Waterways would be an easier suggestion, imo, than separating the Ocean from the Freshwater. Doesn't mean it couldn't be done in the future, I just think that is an easier way to hit it from at first. It's ok if people disagree with me. But a jungle could just as easily bleed over into swampy areas or just general Tropical regions, or anything. I think it is easier to think of them as "Regions" or "Shared Biomes or Ecology" or even just make up unique Valk type names for them. The artwork would still represent these areas. If not the entire area, at least important parts of it. Putting Mountains and Tundra Together, they may not always go together in the biome strata on Earth, but they do have relations that wouldn't make them logically crazy things to relate or combine. And it doesn't have to be that, again, it's just another suggestion.

 

I wouldn't have suggested it on my own, but the PM TJ had Cinn post from ... was it 2013... I think was a really original idea and I like the idea of it. And I just don't know how fast we are going to get new biomes when we just got artwork from the old one. That's pretty much the summary. Not against new biomes. Very much for. I just think renaming or reorganizing the current ones while keeping their original biome as a portion of it might be an easier start than rebuilding the biome system from scratch. And on that, I could be totally wrong, but I don't know. That's just my gut feeling.

I really dislike the idea of "expanding" the biomes. That suggestion made sense in 2013 but since then a lot of breeds have been added. When someone says "can be done in the future", I start laughing. It takes years and years to have a suggestion implemented. If TJ was to implement the "expansion", let's say now, it would take other five years (referencing split of the cave in 6 biomes) and 50 more breeds before new biomes are considered.

I spent 45 minutes in the Alpine, looking for a Balloon. Even with the 5 minutes shuffle and considering that the Alpine is one of the fastest-moving biomes, there are so many breeds there that it takes forever to find a common egg.

Last consideration: any guess why the expansion was not implemented? I would have thought that renaming the biomes would not involve particular coding efforts.

Share this post


Link to post

*shrugs* Who knows? Maybe because TJ told us that Jungle also included tropical grasslands, while forest includes temperate grasslands, and both include bodies of water?

 

However, I agree with you about finding commons being too hard (sometimes) and think it's time to reconsider shuffling upon refresh or a shuffle at least every minute, with "small drops" every five minutes like we have them now.

Share this post


Link to post

If the biomes include more than what is specifically named in the title, the text for the biome needs to reference that in some way (although if more text is added, the text really needs to go below the eggs on mobile, or there really will be a problem for people using small devices). People who have not specifically seen that post still have no idea that the tree biomes theoretically include grasslands as well. Not everyone even goes on the forums at all, after all.

Share this post


Link to post

Well... we could always put it in a hoverbox, like the sort of thing that pops up when you run your mouse over 'Overall Views' and 'Unique Views' on your dragon pages. I'm not sure if it would be better to have it on the link itself or on the page title of each biome, but honestly it's the only thing that makes sense to me. Any other way would result in huge biome names, stretching it out weirdly, or forcing TJ to pile it up in a strange manner. Hoverboxes would be a neat, and imo, elegant solution to this.

Share this post


Link to post

What you describe is probably better than nothing, but from the discussion in the "new layout" thread, some people didn't even know the hoverboxes over the views etc even existed. And how to they work on mobile where you don't have a cursor?

Share this post


Link to post
What you describe is probably better than nothing, but from the discussion in the "new layout" thread, some people didn't even know the hoverboxes over the views etc even existed. And how to they work on mobile where you don't have a cursor?

If I tap my finger on the words, the hoverbox pops up. Therefore it would be best to probably put them on the title of the individual pages, to accommodate mobile users.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.